Item6Appendix2BObjection20200013DETKingussie

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 6 Appendix 2B 28/08/2020

AGENDA ITEM 6

APPENDIX 2B

2020/0013/DET

REP­RES­ENT­A­TIONS OBJECTION

Com­ments for Plan­ning Applic­a­tion 2020/0013/DET

Applic­a­tion Sum­mary Applic­a­tion Num­ber: 2020/0013/DET Address: Land 65M South Of 22 Ker­row Drive Kin­gussie Pro­pos­al: Erec­tion of 22 apart­ments, form­a­tion of access road, SUDS, land­scap­ing Case Officer: Stephanie Wade

Cus­tom­er Details Name: Mr Dav­id Fal­lows Address: Woodlea Main Street Newtonmore

Com­ment Details Com­menter Type: Mem­ber of Pub­lic Stance: Cus­tom­er objects to the Plan­ning Applic­a­tion Com­ment Reas­ons: Comment:Holding objec­tion pending cla­ri­fic­a­tions. Sur­face water drain­age. I am con­cerned that the tri­al pits in appendix B logs appear to have been tested on 7^th August 2008 — in the drier part of the year and twelve years ago. How can we be assured these are still rel­ev­ant and accur­ate, espe­cially with very tight and lim­ited SUDS arrange­ments? Dis­abled park­ing bays. It is obvi­ous that dis­abled bays should be sited adja­cent to the access paths to ground floor apart­ments. Neither of the bays shown do this, one being adja­cent to a first floor access and the oth­er being com­pletely dis­con­nec­ted. Can extra thought be giv­en to this? Park­ing incon­sist­en­cies. There are incon­sist­en­cies between the visu­al­isa­tions shown in the state­ment and the site lay­out plans. The plans show no park­ing bays in front of block A but the visu­al­isa­tion clearly indic­ates vehicles parked in front of the build­ing. It is dif­fi­cult to under­stand why res­id­ents in block A or block F should be denied con­veni­ent park­ing when all oth­ers have that facil­ity. I appre­ci­ate that a road nar­row­ing is indic­ated (on the swept path ana­lys­is only) in front of block A, which would block off park­ing access, but sug­gest this nar­row­ing should be ​‘round the corner’ on the north­ern side. I also do not under­stand why the park­ing bays for block F should be so very much detached. In gen­er­al, how­ever, I am sup­port­ive of the gen­er­al lay­out, design and fin­ishes pro­posed though dis­ap­poin­ted that no indic­a­tion is giv­en of the likely fin­ished tar­get cost of these houses bey­ond the note that this will not exceed a some­what extraordin­ary £200,000